RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. THIS DAY.

Auckland Star, Volume IX, Issue 2565, 27 June 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. THIS DAY.

(Before R. C. Banstow Esq., KM.) JUDGMENTS FOE. PLAINTIFFS.

John Carr Kiug v. Jno. Duke, claim, £5 9s rent, cost 18s ; John Young v. Joseph "Worms, claim, £3 9s groceries. Defendant said he -would pay 10s a "week. Mr Young said he objected to this, as defendant had got the goods on sale or return, and had spent both principal and profit. No order. Holland and Co. v. Joseph. Worms, claim, £18 od, goods, (Mr Deufaar for plaintiff). Costs £1 4s 6d. Jonathan Heape v. Arthur Carter, claim, £5 4s lid, goods, £2 Is. (Mr George for plaintiff.) Robert Cundallv. William Kenuddy' claim £1 11s 4d, goods, costs, 14s; Robert Hall v. Henry Sclmmacker , claim £6 12ss grazing horses, costs, £1 19s ; Kobert Glasgow, v. Thomas Allen, milk bill, £6 ss. JUDGMENT SUMMONS CASES. William Nieholls v, John Dowd. Claim, £1818s. The case had been adjourned from time for convenience of defendant. Mr Tho.iue deposed that defendant, who was the master of a cutter, was quite aware of these proceedings, and in a position to pay. Mr Thome believed that unless an order was made, defendant would not trouble about the debt, it was simply carelessness on his part. His Worship made an order for payment by instalments of 5s per week, or in default, two months imprisonment. Albert E. Glover v. James Hubbard. Claim, £10 ISs, board-and lodging. Mr Glover deposed that he was an hotelkeeper, and the claim had been standing for a long time. Defendant was a fireman on board a steamship, earning £9 per month. Ordered to pay 40s amonth, or in default, two months imprisonment. j^John Jeffrey v. George Warsmau. _ Claim, £19 2s. Mr. George, for plaintiff, said he was instructed that defendant was in a position to pay, and he was in receipt of a pension. Defendant said he was not in a position to pay, and when his pension of £9 per quarter became due it went like snaw before the sun. His Avife kept a school. Adjourned for a month. Messrs Hesketh and Richmond v. Henry Phillips. Claim, £3 3s bill of costs. Mr Thome for Plaintiff, in whose fovour a judgment was given, costs, £1 4s.

ADJOUKNED CASES. C. J. Hutchinson v. George Martin. Claim, £10 goods. Chas. Hopkins v. H. Down. Claim. £7 Bs. DEFENDED. Sloane and Murray v. Wra. Edgar. Claim/ £4 10s 6d. Mr Keating for plaintiff; Mr Thorne denied the claim for defendant. Mr Keating asked for an adjournment in order that an important witness might be present. Mr Thorne had no objection, provided plaintiffs paid costs to which plaintiff's counsel agreed. Adjourned for a month. THE SMASH IN CHANCERY LANE. Alexander Drummond v. James Lindsay, Claim, £18 4s 3d. Mr Brock and Mr Mackechine for plaintiff, and Mr Tole for defendant. Mr Tole made a humorous address in the opening of this case, and stated the particulars. He thought there was nothing to defend. His Worship thought there were facts stated sufficient for the action, damages done to plaintiff by a in defendants possession.

Mr Tole said the case was brought in such a loose manner that he really felt there was no cause of action. The language of the information was not explicit. Mr Brock characterised Mr Tole's arguments as special pleading. Mr Tole asked what really was the nature of the damage.

Mr Brock said the window and frame were smashed, and a valuable china tea-pot aud other crockery rendered useless. His Worship said the information was certainly defective.

Mr Brock said in a short time he should -bo in a position to furnish a list of properties destroyed, aud the case wss allowed to stsnd over until Mr Brock's return.

The case was adjourned until Thursday next.